Embattled PN leader Adrian Delia told The Sunday Times of Malta yesterday that he put down all assets and revenue streams that he was obliged to declare in his declaration of assets to Parliament last April.

He maintained that he was even “more forthcoming than most” of his peers in divulging his financial affairs, although he would not be drawn into revealing his current tally of monthly income.

“I submitted the declaration in Parliament to the fullness as obliged in law. I think I already revealed more than any other politician in the recent history of our nation, and I don’t think I should give more details,” he said in answer to a question on his current global monthly income.  

Questions about his income arose after the leak of court documents in his marital separation proceedings last week showed that the court had ordered him to pay his wife alimony and child maintenance amounting to €2,750 monthly, as well as his five children’s school fees – amounting to several thousand euros per term – and medical costs.

On top of that he is saddled with substantial monthly remortgage payments on his loans – his loans amount to around €700,000 according to a tally in last April’s parliamentary declaration.

Dr Delia pockets about €2,700 from his parliamentary remuneration, his chief publicly known income – much less than his monthly outlays. It was this apparent disparity between his known income and his monthly financial commitments – something brought into sharp relief after the imposition of relatively high maintenance payments in last week’s court decree – that triggered much chatter in political circles, including mutterings in high places within the PN.

It was all this talk that impelled this newspaper’s inquiries into Dr Delia’s other sources of income and whether he had omitted to declare such income in his last declaration of financial affairs submitted to Parliament.

I already revealed more than any other politician in the recent history of our nation

Contacted on the phone yesterday, he insisted that he would not discuss the modalities of the maintenance set by the court because of the agreement in court of non-disclosure of details of the personal separation case. “But I am willing to talk about my income if you ask me questions on that,” he added.

He reiterated that he had not received “any income whatsoever from the party”, reaffirming his decision to forgo a party leader’s salary from the PN in the same spirit as his predecessor.

He explained that he has two sources of income: the ‘remuneration from Parliament’ and another deriving from what he said was the sale of his business interests in the legal firm he held, which is payable to him on a monthly basis.

“Other than that,” he said, “I do not have any other income.”

 “And just a point of curiosity: I do not walk around with bags of €500 notes,” he quipped, referring to allegations made elsewhere this week. He said he would continue supplying all information in Parliament about his financial matters “as obligated”.

He also dismissed any doubts about his ability to fulfill his financial commitments by saying that if he hadn’t kept up with remortgage payments then “the bank would be after me”.

As for the fees imposed by the court last week – alimony, maintenance, school fees and medical costs – he said that on balance these were not costs that arose last week.

“I was spending that money anyway to maintain my children and wife before the separation,” he explained. “So separation or not, nothing much has changed in this regard.” 

In setting maintenance levels, the Family Court assesses the children’s lifestyle before the separation as well as the means of the parent that would be burdened with the maintenance payments.

A maintenance is then set that would seek to maintain the children’s way of life prior to the separation while taking into consideration the regular income of the paying parent. Normally it is less than half the regular income of that parent, but there are no set formulas for calculating maintenance and each case is assessed in its own merits.

It also depends on the request and counter offer of the parties, particularly in the early stages of the proceedings.

In fact court orders on matters such as maintenance and care arrangements of children are provisional in the course of the proceedings. The Delias’ case is still at the initial ‘mediation proceedings’, not even a full-blown lawsuit yet.

“Since I got into politics I have been very transparent about my financial matters,” Dr Delia maintained. “I know of no other politician who has been as transparent.”